Jason,
a very good argument against moving it to framework level.
It would seem that we can only move it to framework level if
Instrument is a correct formalization of instrumentation -
which it isn't, if I understand your argument.
I see these solutions for the instrument interfaces:
1. Don't move them into framework.
2. Move them into framework, but *always* provide them in a
separate jar. (avalon-framework-ext-instrument.jar or
somesuch.)
3. Move them into some org.apache.avalon.framework.ext.instrument
package, always bundle in separate jar.
For now, I'm +1 on 2 or 3. Having the instrument package at a
framework level makes sense, dependency-wise, although not
from a formal POV, as you say.
Does any of the above make sense?
/LS
> From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
